Las Vegas Businessman Predicts Romney Will Win by a Landslide 

DIRECT FROM CAESAR’S PALACE

A Las Vegas oddsmaker gives his reasons for a big win by Romney in November. 

September 30, 2012 6:28 AM 

by Wayne Allyn Root

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas odds maker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

But as an odds maker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December I released my New Year's Predictions. I predicted back then- before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt- that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day. But that on election day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter . Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient- common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now- and that is a bad harbinger.

Now to an analysis of the voting blocks that matter in U.S. politics:

**Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians. He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

**Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel . Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed. I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60's. This is not good news for Obama.

**Youth voters. Obama's biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama.

**Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won't happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

**Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to give someone different a chance. As I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business...that he'd support unions over the private sector in a big way...that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn't listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

**Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

**Suburban moms. The issue isn't contraception, it's having a job to pay for contraception. Obama's economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children's future. This is not good news for Obama.

**Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in America wake up on election day saying, I didn't vote for Obama 4 years ago, but he's done such a fantastic job, I can't wait to vote for him today. Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My instincts as a Vegas odds maker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama's radical and risky socialist agenda. It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I'll give Obama credit for one thing: He is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

Democratic pollsters are attempting to suppress the Romney vote by releasing bogus poll results based on skewed numbers, so just make sure you and everyone you know votes. Reagan was behind by 8% in the Gallup Poll in 1980 with less than ten days to go; and he won by 9.7%.

Not One More Word Is Needed

Is It?

A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION:

Do you believe it's possible to have and maintain honesty and integrity, and still have a successful career in politics?

Third Post Today. Please scroll down and read them all.

HEADLINES from LUCIANNE.com

 

Candidates Tangle in Fractious Debate 

An over-coached Obama makes for an

unpleasant evening.

 

Desperate and dirty! Obama goes for jugular in ugly clashes

with Romney during fiery debate - but will it turn

round his ailing campaign? 

Some people react badly when cornered.

 

Obama went aggressive – and looked offensive 

Style may have saved his campaign for a

nano-second but rough times ahead.

Moderator Crowley helps Obama rebut Romney on Libya 

There's a great deal of complaining about Crowley this a.m.

 

Yes, They Played Politics on Libya 

The "L" word comes up, O goes bat-guano with

words that will haunt.

 

Obama's Candy 

Cringe Worthy Crowley: In case you missed, here's what

the uproar over Candy Crowley is all about

 

Romney for President 

A surprise endorsement from a very liberal New York paper.

Second Post Today. Please scroll down to see the first as well.

Candy Crowley Shills for Obama at Hofstra Debate!

I saw the pre-debate criticisms of Candy Crowley, and I held back from commenting. I wanted to give her a chance. But I can honestly say now that this was the worst debate moderation in presidential debate history --- and I've been watching them since 1988. The moderator's jobs is to moderate, which means to act as a referee and keep the proceedings on track. 

A moderator is never a participant, for to do so means inevitably to take up sides. So for President Obama to call on Crowley for a fact check during the debate is like asking the NFL refs to give you a favorable spot for the first down in the 4th quarter of a game that's all tied up. No one would ever countenance it, and as the post-debate spin picks up, especially over the next couple of days, CNN's going to come in for enormous criticism for propping up the president and violating the announced rules and advanced directives of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2012/10/candy-crowley-shills-for-obama-at.html

My Two Cents: 

CANDY WHO CAN DO DOO DOO and make BOO BOO should be a NO NO

To her credit she'd had her beautiful-but-aged face lifted since the last time I saw her, and at least she had the good sense to wear black which successfully minimized the off-putting effect of her bloated shapeless body.

As to her performance last night, it was so obviously biased in favor of Obama, and so eager to balk, cut off and shut up the excellent Governor Romney it was embarrassing and infuriating to behold.

The folks at FOX bent over backward in the post-debate "analysis" to give Devilobama his due I found it irksome.

Obama was VOCIFEROUS all right, but he STUNK OUT LOUD.

CANDY was anything but DANDY.

AFTER the debate Candy “walked back” her partisan support of Obama on the Benghazi question and admitted she was wrong. 

TOO LITTLE! TOO LATE! 

The damage had already been done.

~ FreeThinke

The Verdict

ROMNEY 

Rock Solid, Sincere

Forceful But Not Belligerent

Admirably In Control

Affable, Engaged

CREDIBLE

OBAMA

Defensive, Hostile, Stale

Loud, Fervid, Overbearing, 
Mendacious, Loquacious 
INADEQUATE

99.44 percent

HORSE PUCKEY

POLITICIZED BENGHAZI DISTRACTS FROM BIG BIRD

Obama spokesperson Jen Psaki, speaking on board Air Force One on Thursday: “There’s only one candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo, and he is riding on this plane.”

by Mark Steyn

Oct 13, 2012  - NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE

‘The entire reason that this has become the political topic it is is because of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.”

Thus, Stephanie Cutter, President Obama’s deputy campaign manager, speaking on CNN about an armed attack on the 9/11 anniversary that left a U.S. consulate a smoking ruin and killed four diplomatic staff, including the first American ambassador to be murdered in a third of a century. To discuss this event is apparently to “politicize” it and to distract from the real issues the American people are concerned about. For example, Obama spokesperson Jen Psaki, speaking on board Air Force One on Thursday: “There’s only one candidate in this race who is going to continue to fight for Big Bird and Elmo, and he is riding on this plane.”

She’s right! The United States is the first nation in history whose democracy has evolved to the point where its leader is provided with a wide-body transatlantic jet in order to campaign on the vital issue of public funding for sock puppets. Sure, Caligula put his horse in the senate, but it was a real horse. At Ohio State University, the rapper will.i.am introduced the president by playing the Sesame Street theme tune, which oddly enough seems more apt presidential-walk-on music for the Obama era than “Hail to the Chief.”

Obviously, Miss Cutter is right: A healthy mature democracy should spend its quadrennial election on critical issues like the Republican party’s war on puppets rather than attempting to “politicize” the debate by dragging in stuff like foreign policy, national security, the economy, and other obscure peripheral subjects. But, alas, it was her boss who chose to “politicize” a security fiasco and national humiliation in Benghazi. At 8:30 p.m., when Ambassador Stevens strolled outside the gate and bid his Turkish guest good night, the streets were calm and quiet. At 9:40 p.m., an armed assault on the compound began, well planned and executed by men not only armed with mortars but capable of firing them to lethal purpose — a rare combination among the excitable mobs of the Middle East.

There was no demonstration against an Islamophobic movie that just got a little out of hand. Indeed, there was no movie protest at all. Instead, a U.S. consulate was destroyed and four of its personnel were murdered in one of the most sophisticated military attacks ever launched at a diplomatic facility.

This was confirmed by testimony to Congress a few days ago, although you could have read as much in my column of four weeks ago. Nevertheless, for most of those four weeks, the president of the United States, the secretary of state, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, and others have persistently attributed the Benghazi debacle to an obscure YouTube video — even though they knew that the two events had nothing to do with each other by no later than the crack of dawn Eastern time on September 12, by which point the consulate’s survivors had landed safely in Tripoli.

To “politicize” means “to give a political character to.” It is a reductive term, capturing the peculiarly shrunken horizons of politics: “Gee, they nuked Israel. D’you think that will hurt us in Florida?” So media outlets fret that Benghazi could be “bad” for Obama — by which they mean he might be hitting the six-figure lecture circuit four years ahead of schedule. But for Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods, it’s real bad. They’re dead, over, gonesville. Given that Obama and Secretary Clinton refer to Stevens pneumatically as “Chris,” as if they’ve known him since third grade, why would they dishonor the sacrifice of their close personal friend by peddling an utterly false narrative as to why he died? You want “politicization”? Secretary Clinton linked the YouTube video to the murder of her colleagues even as the four caskets lay alongside her at Andrews Air Force Base — even though she had known for days that it had nothing to do with it. It’s weird enough that politicians now give campaign speeches to returning coffins. But to conscript your “friend”’s corpse as a straight man for some third-rate electoral opportunism is surely as shriveled and worthless as “politicization” gets.

In the vice-presidential debate, asked why the White House spent weeks falsely blaming it on the video, Joe Biden took time off between big toothy smirks to reply: “Because that was exactly what we were told by the intelligence community.” That too is false. He also denied that the government of which he is nominally second-in-command had ever received a request for additional security. At the risk of “politicizing” things, this statement would appear also to be untrue.

Instead, the State Department outsourced security for the Benghazi consulate to Blue Mountain, a Welsh firm that hires ex-British and -Commonwealth special forces, among the toughest hombres on the planet. The company’s very name comes from the poem “The Golden Journey to Samarkand,” whose words famously adorn the regimental headquarters of Britain’s Special Air Service in Hereford.  Unfortunately, the one-year contract for consulate security was only $387,413 — or less than the cost of deploying a single U.S. soldier overseas. On that budget, you can’t really afford to fly in a lot of crack SAS killing machines, and have to make do with the neighborhood talent pool. So who’s available? Blue Mountain hired five members of the Benghazi branch of the February 17 Martyrs’ Brigade and equipped them with handcuffs and batons. A baton is very useful when someone is firing an RPG at you, at least if you play a little baseball. There were supposed to be four men heavily armed with handcuffs on duty that night, but, the date of September 11 having no particular significance in the Muslim world, only two guards were actually on shift.

Let’s pause right there, and “politicize” a little more. Liberals are always going on about the evils of “outsourcing” and “offshoring” — selfish vulture capitalists like Mitt shipping jobs to cheap labor overseas just to save a few bucks. How unpatriotic can you get! So now the United States government is outsourcing embassy security to cheap Welshmen who in turn outsource it to cheaper Libyans. Diplomatic facilities are U.S. sovereign territory — no different de jure from Fifth Avenue or Mount Rushmore. So defending them is one of the core responsibilities of the state. But that’s the funny thing about Big Government: The bigger it gets, the more of life it swallows up, the worse it gets at those very few things it’s supposed to be doing. So, on the first anniversary of 9/11 in a post-revolutionary city in which Western diplomats had been steadily targeted over the previous six months, the government of the supposedly most powerful nation on earth entrusted its security to Abdulaziz Majbari, 29, and his pal, who report to some bloke back in Carmarthen, Wales. 

In the days before the attack Joe Biden had been peddling his Obama campaign slogan that “bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.” The first successful terrorist attack on U.S. sovereign territory since 9/11, and on the very anniversary and by al-Qaeda-linked killers, was not helpful to the Obama team. And so the nature of the event had to be “politicized”: Look, over there — an Islamophobic movie! “Greater love hath no man than this,” quoth the president at Chris Stevens’ coffin, “that a man lay down his life for his friends.” Smaller love hath no man than Obama’s, than to lay down his “friend” for a couple of points in Ohio.

Images from the Recent Past 

To Love and Cherish

An excellent summary of last Thursday's
Vice-presiDENTAL debate.

What more do we need to say?

Questions Concerning 

The Nature of Liberty

"Extremism in defense of Liberty is no vice."

"Moderation in war is imbecilic."

Do the collectivist mentality and the nanny state foster policies favoring a maximal amount of freedom for the individual?

If you believe they do, please explain how and why?

Are determined hostility, unrestrained rudeness, unswerving disputatiousness, relentless rebelliousness and unchecked intractability necessary components of a free society? If so, why?

Where is the value in being determined always to talk, but never to listen? Does such a determination serve the interests of liberty or oppression? In which of those two categories does One-Way Rudeness properly belong?

In what ways could policies consisting of nothing but denigration, vilification and condemnation be constructive?

What is the difference between liberty and license?

Could it in any way be possible to use deception, subterfuge, mendacity –– and even sabotage –– to institute a reign of truth?

Does she look friendly and welcoming, or formidable and challenging to you?

[NOTE: Mocking, denouncing, or questioning the motives of the questioner, while derisively dismissing the questions, themselves, as unworthy of response would be considered a tactic –– not an answer.]


~ FreeThinke

STEATOPYGIA

DEFINITION: An unusual  accumulation of fat 

in and around the buttocks. 

This deposit of fat is not confined to the gluteal regions, but extends to the outside and front of the thighs, forming a thick layer reaching sometimes to the knee. 

In certain circles the phenomenon
is considered "a beauty" among women

This curious development constitutes a racial characteristic of the Bushmen It is specially a feature of the women, but it occurs in a less degree in the males. It is also common among the Hottentots, and has been noted among the pygmies of Central Africa. In women it is regarded among them as a beauty: it begins in infancy and is fully developed on the first pregnancy. It is often accompanied by the peculiar formation known as "the Hottentot-apron" hypertrophy*  of the nymphae –– i.e. the labia minora or lesser lips of the vulva; a pair of folds of mucous membrane on the inner side of the labia majora, united over the clitoris. 

No satisfactory explanation of these malformations has been offered. Steatopygia would seem to have been a characteristic of a race which once extended from the Gulf of Aden  to the Cape of Good Hope, of which stock Bushmen and pygmies are remnants. The discovery in the caves of the south of France of figures in ivory presenting a remarkable development of the thighs, and even the peculiar prolongation of the nymphae, has been used to support the theory that a steatopygous race once existed in Europe. 

Our first family enjoying the beauties of nature

What seems certain is that steatopygia in both sexes was fairly widespread among the early races of man. While the Bushmen and Hottentots afford the most noticeable examples of its development, it is by no means rare in other parts of Africa, and occurs even more frequently among Bastaards of the male sex than among Hottentot women.

Guess who was caught biking on the Beltway?

____________________________________

* hypertrophy - a swelling to abnormal size of a bodily organ

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Steatopygia

How Many Different Ways 

Can You Say Ess-Aitch-Eye-Tea?

[NOTE: Please don't miss the links added below]

An Off-the-Cuff Response to the Vice Presidential Debate

"If a wise man has an argument with a fool, 

the fool only rages and laughs, 

and there is no quiet." Proverbs 29:9

What's your criterion for "winning" a debate?

Is it a Personality Contest?

Will enough people care about substance to make a difference?

Are there enough people out there who can spot the difference between loquacious balderdash and genuine substance to matter?

The former is Biden's stock-in-trade. He's almost as good at saying nothing in more words than you can shake a stick at as our not-so-illustrious president.

As a pair of first-rate gasbags, this year's Democratic candidates are frankly peerless.

So what is it that "wins" a debate?

Vice-President Joe Biden has one of the loudest, most persistent motormouths in the business. He's an arrant boor.

Paul Ryan is a sober, decent, thoughtful, good-looking guy in good command of his facts, but during the debate, Biden would hardly let him get a word in edgewise.

And whenever Ryan managed to squeeze out a sentence or two, Biden stepped all over his lines. [Reminds me of Bill O'Reilly. Could this be an IRISH thing, do you suppose? Oh wait! Ryan is Irish too, isn't he? Probably the lace curtain variety, though, right? It DOES make a difference.]

Martha Raddatz seems very pleasant, but she did nothing to stop Biden the Bombastic Barroom Brawler, who sounds like he was weaned on beer suds under the bar in a low-class Irish Saloon, from tromping all over the debate.

It doesn't matter WHAT you say, apparently, as long as its LOUD, FAST and RELENTLESS.

Let’s face it: Joe Biden is a FILIBASTARD.

Ryan should win on substance, of course, but Biden is LOUDER and more AGGRESSIVE. Ergo, Biden will most likely be declared the winner by the enemedia.

At least that's the way it looked with a half hour left to go in the debate ....

Later, at the bottom of the hour NOTHING had CHANGED for the better. It was all more of the same.

How many different ways can you think of to say ess-aitch-eye-tea?

~ FreeThinke

ADDENDA: 

HEADLINES at the DRUDGE REPORT:

CNN POLL: R 48% B 44%...

Chris Wallace: I've never seen a candidate as disrespectful as Biden...

Borger: Came Off As Condescending...

Hume: 'Cranky Old Man'...

Noonan: 'The old man pushed, and the kid pushed back'...

Biden Interrupted Ryan 82 Times?

AP: 'Laugh, chuckle, grimace, grin, smirk, goofy face'...

RNC AD: THE LAUGHTER...

CNN: Raddatz 'the third debater'...

REALCLEAR MAP SHOWS SHIFT...

Have you met Laughing Boy?

A pressing question all of us need to ask:

WHO is JOE BIDEN'S DENTIST?

YOUR ONE ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL 

NEWS ITEM OF THE DAY:

Restaurant Removes Urinals Shaped Like a Woman's Mouth

Going the Way of Ancient Rome and Then Some

Urinals created by Dutch designer Meike van Schijndel are pictured in Germany in 2008. A sumptuous new French restaurant in Sydney, Australia said Wednesday it would remove two urinals designed to resemble a woman's lipsticked mouth, apologising for any offence they have caused.

OCTOBER 10, 2012

AFP - A sumptuous new French restaurant in Sydney said Wednesday it would remove two urinals designed to resemble a woman's lipsticked mouth, apologising for any offence they have caused.

The Ananas Bar and Brasserie said the bright red-lipped urinals shaped like an open mouth were "a commonly used European design piece from female Dutch artist Meike van Schijndel".

"We sincerely apologise if they have caused offence. They are being removed today," a spokeswoman said in a statement.

The stylish restaurant opened three weeks ago, with the Sydney Morning Herald's food reviewer describing the urinals as "no real surprise here at Ananas, merely adding to the extraordinary collision of statements and intent".

But feminist, former political adviser and writer Anne Summers said the design was offensive. "Misogyny is very widespread, and this is just an example of misogyny," said Summers.

"The concept is pretty challenging and confronting. They're asking men to put their d(expletive) in these mouths as urinals."

Australia is the grip of a fierce political debate about sexism after Prime Minister Julia Gillard, the nation's first woman leader, accused opposition leader Tony Abbott of being a misogynist.

The unmarried Gillard said Tuesday she had been personally offended by many of Abbott's remarks over the years –– from urging her to "make an honest woman of herself", to his cat-calling at her in parliament.

"If he wants to know what misogyny looks like in modern Australia, he doesn't need a motion in the House of Representatives, he needs a mirror," she said in stinging comments.

Afterlife Exists 

Says Top Brain Surgeon

A prominent scientist who had previously dismissed the possibility of the afterlife says he has reconsidered his belief after experiencing an out of body experience which has convinced him that heaven exists.

by Mark Hughes, New York

7:52 PM BST 09 Oct 2012

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9597345/Afterlife-exists-says-top-brain-surgeon.html

Dr. Eben Alexander, a Harvard-educated neurosurgeon, fell into a coma for seven days in 2008 after contracting meningitis.

During his illness Dr Alexander says that the part of his brain which controls human thought and emotion "shut down" and that he then experienced "something so profound that it gave me a scientific reason to believe in consciousness after death." In an essay for American magazine Newsweek, which he wrote to promote his book Proof of Heaven, Dr Alexander says he was met by a beautiful blue-eyed woman in a "place of clouds, big fluffy pink-white ones" and "shimmering beings".

He continues: "Birds? Angels? These words registered later, when I was writing down my recollections. But neither of these words do justice to the beings themselves, which were quite simply different from anything I have known on this planet. They were more advanced. Higher forms." The doctor adds that a "huge and booming like a glorious chant, came down from above, and I wondered if the winged beings were producing it. the sound was palpable and almost material, like a rain that you can feel on your skin but doesn't get you wet."

Dr Alexander says he had heard stories from patients who spoke of outer body experiences but had disregarded them as "wishful thinking" but has reconsidered his opinion following his own experience.

He added: "I know full well how extraordinary, how frankly unbelievable, all this sounds. Had someone even a doctor told me a story like this in the old days, I would have been quite certain that they were under the spell of some delusion.

"But what happened to me was, far from being delusional, as real or more real than any event in my life. That includes my wedding day and the birth of my two sons." He added: "I've spent decades as a neurosurgeon at some of the most prestigous medical institutions in our country. I know that many of my peers hold as I myself did to the theory that the brain, and in particular the cortex, generates consciousness and that we live in a universe devoid of any kind of emotion, much less the unconditional love that I now know God and the universe have toward us.

"But that belief, that theory, now lies broken at our feet. What happened to me destroyed it."